664 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 839 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding the arrest lawful and the admission of prior testimony admissible on most counts, while remanding one count for failure to exhaust state remedies.
-
The court held that the defendant waived his right to poll the jury by not requesting it after the verdict was announced and that a minor variance in the indictment was not grounds for reversal.
-
417 F.2d 394·
10th Cir.·
1969-10-07
·cited 10×
A warrantless search of a vehicle conducted after the occupants have been arrested and the vehicle is in police custody is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and admission of evidence obtained from such a search is not harmless error if it may have contributed to the convic
-
The denial of a pre-trial sanity hearing transcript to an indigent defendant, when the transcript is necessary for effective defense preparation, violates the Equal Protection Clause.
-
379 F.2d 799·
8th Cir.·
1967-07-10
·cited 10×
The court held that the taking of handwriting exemplars from a defendant in custody does not violate the Fifth or Sixth Amendments, and a prosecutor's improper comment about an indictment, if promptly addressed by the court, is not necessarily prejudicial error.
-
291 F.2d 342·
D.C. Cir.·
1961-05-11
·cited 10×
The court held that the FCC's denial of a television station's transmitter relocation application was supported by substantial evidence and within the Commission's discretion, even if the applicant met minimal technical requirements.
-
Granville Ritchie was convicted of first-degree murder, sexual battery of a child under twelve, and aggravated child abuse in connection with the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl left in his care, and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed all convictions and the death sentenc
-
A trial court does not violate a defendant's due process or Fifth Amendment rights by considering the defendant's failure to take responsibility when the defendant voluntarily allocutes at sentencing. The statutory maximum sentence in a noncapital case is a legal sentence by virt
-
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions of Renado Smith and Richard Delancy for conspiracy to commit alien smuggling and related offenses, holding that the district court did not err in admitting the videotaped deposition testimony of a key witness (Vanessa Armstrong Vixama
-
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appeals a wrongful death judgment in favor of Diane Schleider and her daughter following Andrew Schleider's death from lung cancer and COPD. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District affirms the judgment, holding that the closing arguments
-
Peter Baptiste appealed his convictions for armed robbery and conspiracy to rob, challenging the admission of incriminating statements he made to police. The court reversed because officers misrepresented the law by promising Baptiste he could only be charged with simple robbery
-
Anthony Williams was convicted after the trial court denied his request to represent himself, finding he lacked legal knowledge and competency. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court applied the wrong legal standard—competency to waive counsel
-
Defendant Espute was convicted of aggravated battery and battery arising from a violent altercation. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's denial of his mistrial motion based on the prosecutor's improper comment on his right to remain silent. The Fourth District Court of App
-
The court held that limiting cross-examination into a witness's potential deal with the state violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
-
478 So. 2d 467·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1985-11-13
·cited 9×
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for severance because the codefendants' confessions were sufficiently interlocking and admissible under Parker v. Randolph, and any error was harmless.
-
403 So. 2d 542·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1981-09-02
·cited 9×
An otherwise valid conviction need not be voided when the state corrects an erroneous date in charging documents by amending the statement of particulars after jeopardy attaches, provided the defendant knew the true date, was afforded an opportunity to cure any prejudice, and the
-
The trial court erred by imputing income to the former wife effective immediately without allowing time for therapy, and by awarding durational alimony without making specific factual findings regarding the former wife's monthly expenses and the former husband's actual ability to
-
The trial court erred in overruling the defense objection to prosecutorial closing argument that impermissibly commented on the defendant's silence during jail calls and shifted the burden of proof. The trial court also erred in denying the peremptory strike of a prospective juro
-
Glenn Blair appealed his probation revocation sentence, challenging the trial court's assessment of 160 points for sexual penetration on his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that because Blair pled no contest to charges alleging the alter
-
The court held that while the trial court erred in enhancing the sentence without a jury finding or admission, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to clear and uncontested evidence of the victim's vulnerability.
-
Eric Smallridge appeals his convictions for two counts of DUI manslaughter, challenging the jury instruction, denial of his motion to suppress blood-alcohol test results, admission of photographs, restitution order, and the constitutionality of Florida's Criminal Punishment Code.
-
895 So. 2d 1207·
Fla. 5th DCA·
2005-02-25
·cited 8×
Food Lion appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to Maria Henderson for injuries sustained by tripping over an unattended merchandise cart in one of its stores. The appellate court affirmed the judgment because Food Lion failed to challenge both theories of liability submitted t
-
704 So. 2d 752·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1998-01-30
·cited 8×
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in precluding cross-examination regarding pending civil actions filed by the defendant against the victim, as the probative value was outweighed by the danger of confusion or misleading the jury.
-
686 So. 2d 749·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1997-01-10
·cited 8×
The court held that the officer's comment on the defendant's right to remain silent was harmless error, but the public defender's lien was improperly imposed.
-
The court held that the harmless error standard from Chapman v. California applies to this habeas case because the state courts did not have an opportunity to review the constitutional error. The court found the error harmless as to Richley and Holmes, but remanded for further co
-
The court held that admitting gang affiliation evidence as substantive proof of guilt was improper, and that the prosecution breached a plea agreement with a defendant.
-
The court held that disparity in sentences imposed on coconspirators is not a valid basis for departure, nor can it be considered in determining the extent of a departure for substantial assistance. The court also held that a conviction for carrying a concealed weapon, committed
-
The court held that even if the calculation of criminal history points was erroneous, the error was harmless because it did not affect the sentencing range or the sentence imposed.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant about his prior arrests and the nature of those arrests, as this evidence was admissible for impeachment and as substantive evidence of guilt, and any potential error was ha
-
A guilty plea is voluntary if the defendant understands the court is not bound by sentencing recommendations, even if attorneys provide an estimated range. Sentencing guideline calculations are reviewed for error, but harmless errors do not warrant reversal.
-
The court held that the prosecutor's impeachment of the defendant's trial testimony by referencing his post-arrest silence violated the Due Process Clause, and this violation was not harmless error.
-
The court held that Kansas law does not recognize defamation per se, that remedies under the Kansas Acts Against Discrimination preclude a common law retaliatory discharge claim, that negligent supervision is not a recognized tort in Kansas, and that Title VII claims cannot be br
-
557 So. 2d 77·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1990-01-18
·cited 8×
-
893 F.2d 411·
1st Cir.·
1990-01-09
·cited 8×
The court concurs with the majority opinion without qualification.
-
909 F.2d 1234·
9th Cir.·
1989-08-25
·cited 8×
A violation of the Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation is not subject to the harmless-error rule when it arises from the constitutionally improper use of one of multiple legal theories culminating in a general verdict.
-
Federal employees in the excepted service who lack a statutory right to appeal adverse personnel actions cannot compel an agency to bargain over a grievance arbitration procedure that permits challenges to those actions.
-
The admission of a videotaped deposition of a burglary victim, whose unavailability was not properly established, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, but this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
831 F.2d 493·
4th Cir.·
1987-10-16
·cited 8×
The majority decision improperly overruled prior panel precedent (Adkins) by disregarding established principles of federal collateral review and habeas corpus jurisprudence.
-
Roger Armontrout appeals his conviction for grand theft in the second degree and his sentence. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence and remanded for resentencing due to errors in the sentencing scoresheet that were not properly adjudicated by the
-
497 So. 2d 281·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1986-10-09
·cited 8×
A trial judge does not violate Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.410 by responding to a jury's request to review evidence outside the presence of counsel where the jury neither requested additional instructions nor requested that testimony be read to them, as rule 3.410's noti
-
Karen Evrard appealed her sentencing departure from Florida's guidelines. The trial court imposed a 30-month prison sentence based on three factors: an uncounseled prior conviction, a stale prior conviction, and the defendant's alleged dishonesty to Department of Corrections offi
-
The court held that the defendant's petition for rehearing should be denied because no substantial error affecting the outcome of the trial was committed.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a Boiler Safety Inspection Act regulation as evidence of negligence under FELA, nor in excluding testimony and a stipulation regarding the non-taxability of annuity payments.
-
744 F.2d 653·
8th Cir.·
1984-09-28
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court correctly applied collateral estoppel to bar the relitigation of claims that were fully and fairly litigated in state court, and that any procedural errors were harmless.
-
723 F.2d 1165·
5th Cir.·
1984-01-30
·cited 8×
A restriction on cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding potential bias, even if it violates the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause, can be harmless error if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
-
The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by evidence and that no trial errors warranted a new trial, affirming the judgment.
-
The court held that while Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 25(a) was violated by the substitution of judges, the error did not affect substantial rights and thus did not warrant reversal. Other alleged errors regarding impeachment, jury instructions, and prosecutorial misconduc
-
701 F.2d 1150·
6th Cir.·
1983-03-08
·cited 8×
The court held that the state's acquisition and use of a defendant's confidential statement prepared for his attorney violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and this violation was not harmless error.
-
418 So. 2d 1080·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1982-08-04
·cited 8×
A juvenile's confession was obtained after a police officer promised he would not be charged if he confessed. Although the officer later withdrew the promise when the juvenile was caught lying, the court held the subsequent confession inadmissible because the juvenile reasonably
-
413 So. 2d 1302·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1982-05-25
·cited 8×
Sarai Ramos was convicted of two counts of second degree murder and firearm offenses. The Florida appellate court reversed her convictions because the prosecutor improperly commented during voir dire on the defendant's right to remain silent in a manner that invited the jury to d